@scottbb surely the shape rotates but leafs are not rotating, it's only the shape which they form which is rotating. Basically one can create oval iris shape easily, the leafs would be placed in oval shape and the directing grooves on the iris should be designed to keep oval shape.

@Expotr oval aperture is the same as round aperture except initial leafs placement and grooves.

@EuriPinhollow Do you think the oval shape would be kept when the iris is stopped down? I can imagine that you could end up with very different shapes where the leafs meet on each aperture stop.

@Expotr it all depends on the grooves.

@EuriPinhollow Do you know who Richard Gale is?

@Expotr nope.

Did I accidentially use his quote?

@EuriPinhollow He runs a repair / modification service for cinematography lenses

Hehe nope :)

Of course I don't know him.

I've just been curious why he doesn't make oval apertures instead of inserting fixed aperture discs into the lenses

@EuriPinhollow This is where he showcases some of his work vimeo.com/meltingbloke, if that's of interest to you

Absolutely. I will

@EuriPinhollow Would be seriously cool to have a good vintage lens modified with an oval aperture that has many blades.

@EuriPinhollow Here you can see a great example of how nice an oval aperture can be vimeo.com/86647808#t=1m9s

I have limited data plan. )))))

Okay. You should check it out when you're home. It looks great

I am at home. )))))))

Really cannot afford videos.

Except when I download them overnight.

Ahh okay :)

@EuriPinhollow re: rotating opening vs rotating blades: yes, thank you for the clarification. That's exactly what I meant.

@Expotr the thing is, when you stop the aperture down, you begin losing the bokeh you're looking for. Also, if you'll notice in @EuriPinhollow's image, as you stop down, the shape becomes more polygonal (straight-sided) and less rounded. This is unavoidable with an iris aperture.

For the anamorphic-like oval bokeh, you want the ovals to stay vertical, and they probably need to stay smooth, not ovoid-polygonal. I think it would ruin the look (which after all, just comes from the horizontal compression of an anamorphic lens)

@Expotr also, when stopped down a bit, the piecewise-continuous oval-shaped polygon would create diffraction spikes (multi-sided stars) rather than the smoother glare that anamorphics are known for. Diffraction spikes aren't bad per se (it's a matter of taste), but they are not an accurate replacement/simulation of a real anamorphic lens.

@scottbb " This is unavoidable with an iris aperture." radojuva.com/wp-content/uploads/sg/t3fs/… Also rounded blades help to cancel polygonisation.

Its been a while since I've had time to make any tutorials but going to try and find time this weekend to do one. Conference / Travel season for me starts next week so want to get at least one or two in before then.

@EuriPinhollow absolutely, rounded blades help cancel polygonisation. At the widest possible setting, the aperture can be perfectly round. But as I said, as you stop down polygonisation starts to set in. At large f-numbers, even with curved blades, the aperture looks more like a polygon than round, as far as diffraction spike -generation is concerned.

If anyone has any Photoshop tutorial requests ask and thou shall receive, there's little I can't do in there

@EuriPinhollow BTW, that iris you linked to is beautiful. It's a shame they couldn't squeeze just one more blade in there though (it has an even number of blades). If it had 17 blades, the diffraction stars would be gorgeous!

@Ryan can you give me a tutorial on printing money?

;)